What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found it appropriate to grant the assessee another opportunity to be heard to prevent miscarriage of justice. The case was set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal was against an ex parte order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee claimed that notices were not properly served, especially during the Covid period, and their requests for adjournment were ignored.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified, given the assessee's claims of non-receipt of proper notices and ignored adjournment requests.

Tajdin Hasanali Halani, Anand vs ITO | ITAT Ahmedabad 2024

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA&

For Appellant: Shri J L Bhatia, Sr. DR

For Respondent: Shri J L Bhatia, Sr. DR

Hearing: 29/02/2024Pronounced: 08/03/2024

Tajdin Hasanali Halani The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 42/43, Sabina Park, Bhalej Ward -5, Anand Vs. Road, Near Jakat Naka, Anand, Gujarat - 388001 �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AANPH1966P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Vivek Chavda, AR अपीलाथ� ओर से /Appellant by : ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Shri J L Bhatia, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 29/02/2024 Date of Pronouncement 08/03/2024 O R D E R

PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM:

The instant appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.09.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 27.12.2019 passed by the ITO, Ward-5, Anand, under Section 143(3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2017-18.

(Tajdin Hasanali Halani vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2017-18 - 2 – 2. At the time of hearing of the instant appeal, the Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte one; out of four notices two were issued to the assessee during Covid period and the other two during July to September, 2023 where the assessee was unable to appear before the First Appellate Authority but requested for adjournment which was not taken into consideration and the issue was finalized against the assessee. The Ld. Counsel with his all fairness also submitted before us that even before the Ld. AO, the assessee could not appear because of this particular reason of service of notice was made through e-mail which belongs to the earlier counsel and neither the assessee nor the present Counsel’s. As the matter is ultimately finalized ex parte, the assessee prays for another opportunity of being heard to represent his case effectively before the authorities below. Such contention made by the Ld. AR has not objected by the Ld. DR.

Having heard the Ld. Counsel appearing for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we, taking into consideration the impugned ex parte order, find it fit and proper to give a further opportunity of being heard to the assessee in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice. We, therefore, set aside the issue to file of the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudicating the same afresh upon considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file (Tajdin Hasanali Halani vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2017-18 - 3 – at the time of hearing of the matter. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass orders strictly in accordance with law.

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

This Order pronounced on 08/03/2024

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 08/03/2024 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

TAJDIN HASANALI HALANI,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-5, ANAND

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Latest GST High Court judgments